Production on Star Trek: Discovery is scheduled to begin on January 24, 2017, according to the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE) Toronto-based union’s website. Read on to see the details.
The IATSE873 website, which is based in Toronto, lists all of the current productions within its jurisdiction. Details of a production called “Green Harvest” has recently appeared with filming dates from January 24, 2017 through September 7, 2017. The list of producers for the production include Bryan Fuller, Heather Kadin, Gretchen Berg, Aaron Harberts, Aaron Baiers, Loretta Ramos, Kevin Lafferty, and director David Semel.
As we have previously reported all of these names as being involved in the production of Star Trek: Discovery, and Red Shirts Always Die reported in June that “Green Harvest” was the codename being used for Discovery.
— Source link to the entry in the IATSE database.
I hope its beautiful…Star Trek has gone through so many different types of themes, look at the movies alone. Music is often an important element that seems to have been forgotten in Star Trek series’. Imagine Voyager, scored with James Horner. Clap Clap Clap
This is a TOS reboot for TOS fans.
And you have inside information from sources do you? No, didn’t think so.
It’s a prequel, not a reboot. Keep dreaming.
They sold it as a prequel but it is a reboot- just happens to be set before the Original Series but it will not adhere to cannon or the production styles of the period because they don’t care about the fans or respecting cannon.
If you don’t know how to spell “canon,” you’re not qualified to make sweeping statements about it.
How do you know any of that Trekboi? Is that based on actual information or are you just ranting?
Voyager was done by Jerry Goldsmith who was by far the best composer ever to grace the Star Trek world.
Yeah, but VOYAGER was far from JG’s best day. Ditto for his TNG feature work. I think of Goldsmith as composer of the century, but for PLANET OF THE APES, PATTON, TMP, THE WIND AND THE LION … even BREAKHEART PASS and other lesser known efforts, plus a lot of great TV themes in the 60s and 70s.
Voyager and the First Contact score are some of the best stuff from him although yes the TMP soundtrack will probably be his best work. To this day I only sat through that film three times but I still listen to something from that soundtrack almost weekly. It is pretty.
I think his TNG work suffered from the bland wall of sound edict and that the theme was a retread (Although, I thought he did a good job of it.)
However, by VOYAGER, I thought JG outfoxed them a few times and I like the theme so I prefer his work there over TNG.
I like FIRST CONTACT too, but I have to admit, (and I don’t mean this in a BAD way) his son’s fingerprints are all over it, and when I listen to a JG work I prefer it to be dominated by JG. It’s like when they mix pop songs with the score in an album. I might like both, often do, but the mix is jarring when I am in a mood to listen to some smooth cool JG.
Re: VOYAGER was far from JG’s best day
Egad, I hope you are mistaken. I’d hate to think there’s something redeeming to NEMESIS that’d compel me to attempt to stay awake, which I have always failed to do, through the whole thing ONE more time!
NEM has got one good cue, a very good cue, when they’re in the briefing room and then a montage of preparing for battle. I think there’s about 30 wonderful seconds in there, and the music towards the end as the thelaron whatsis is deploying and Data is sailing towards the Scimitar is good too. But overall I think NEM has tired blood in a lot of departments. I think the opening Rom senate cue is more than okay as well, now that I think of it. But it was the first TREK soundtrack I skipped buying immediately (well, FC was given to me, so second.) Come to think of it, NEM was given to me as well …
“I think of Goldsmith as composer of the century,”
John Williams disagrees.
John Williams, Ennio Morricone, and John Barry, to name at least a few
I’ll toss in Bernard Herrmann, Miklos Rozsa, Max Steiner, Leith Stevens, Franz Waxman, I could go on and on.
Goldsmith was best at bombastic, military scores (check out Capricorn One), but in all honesty he less often excelled at sensitive, gentle music (with exceptions of course, such as A Patch of Blue in the ’60s).
E-v-e-r-y composer draws inspiration from artists who went before (including e-v-e-r-y filmmaker!) since the beginning of the art form(s), but the single most glaring instance of filmscore “copying” I’ve heard is Goldsmith’s POTA score, lifting from Stravinsky’s Symphony in Three Movements. Listening to the local classical radio station one day I nearly drove off the road when I heard this.
And yeah, Horner lifted from Prokofiev and others too, but in his later years about a decade or so up to his death, nobody could create emotional, gentle scores that touched the heart like James Horner. And as far as I’m concerned, his soundtracks for STII and STIII are still THE best ST filmscores.
See, and I often really dig the gentle music that is IN his bombastic scores (BREAKHEART PASS is a great example – WIND&LION another.) However, I never got the love for his oscar-winning OMEN score – it sounded like somebody riffing on Barry’s (for me superior) THE LION IN WINTER.
Good info on the Stravinsky, I will youtube that this evening!
I’m sure there are hundreds of examples of soundtrack artist “glaringly riffing” classical artist and their works, so let’s not just single out Goldsmith. Examples that quickly come to my mind are Hans Zimmer borrowing mightily from Stravinsky in the film GLADIATOR; John Williams aping Shostskovich throughout the entire movie NIXON; and Stravinsky in JAWS; and Korngold and Rozsa in STAR WARS…. What was it Picasso said, “Good artist borrow, great artist steal?!”
While I agree Goldsmith did a lot of action scores, and therefore a lot of uptempo music, I don’t agree the majority was militaristic. I do agree Goldsmith didn’t focus on gentle, sensitive melody, however, he did concentrate and excel at theme, which at times can be viewed similarity in it’s usage to melody and at times are one in the same. What I have found though is that the vast, vast majority of musical artist excel and gear toward melody than those that compose with theme and uptempo, which is why I love Goldsmith. He refrained from the easy musical solution of sweet sounding, gentle, satisfying musical expression. In the end though, it’s all about taste.
I liked Horner too, but I do think he riffed himself way, way too much. And, although I loved his music for TREK 2 and 3, neither of those scores, in my opinion, approached the artist level of Goldsmith’s TMP.
For me, Williams peaked in the 70s, right before SW. But he certainly delivered a lot of good scores before that time, and a few after (JFK comes to mind, and parts of EMPIRE.)
I loved the opening score and theme for Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. Love the soundtrack.
Alec… “I loved the opening score and theme for Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.”
I’ve never cared much for the main theme at all. Very repetitive and uninspired. Seems weirdly Christmasy, even though the movie had nothing to do with Christmas. I do like a few of the soundtrack pieces though, like Chekov’s Run and the Hospital Chase, which seem exactly like something from TOS. But if Rosenman was trying for an air of TOS in the Main Theme, he failed spectacularly. I’m still baffled it was nominated for an Oscar.
ST4’s soundtrack is by far the weakest of the movie scores, in my opinion. Rivaled only by Into Darkness (which always seems phoned-in by Giacchino to me.)
Re: theme for Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
I know what you mean. In fact, I play it at Christmas because of that, but if you’ve ever heard ships’ bells sound you’d get what aesthetic Rosenman was setting as a connecting theme between the ships in space and the ships on the water that are both in the movie. Listen to the whaling ship when it sees the Bounty and you’ll hear what I mean.
The main theme from Star Trek IV was a rehash of the main theme from Ralph Bakshi’s Lord of the Rings film. That being said, the theme from Voyage Home is my second favorite Trek film song.
And a lot of the other tracks sound virtually identical to Fantastic Voyage – nothing original between 1966 and 1986…?!
Rosenman had a very narrow style, sounding virtually identical no matter which film he scored, but sometimes (i.e. rarely) he hit the target with his work.
Rosenman was a bit of a Hollywood Insider by that point, and I cite his nom and TVH’s nom for cinematography (which is just as idiotic – the use of smoke in the film is moronic — Chekov runs through a CLOUD BANK of atmosphere during the aircraft carrier sequence) as more associated with popular movie than good one.
Rosenman and Horner do have one thing in common, they reuse like crazy — but at least Rosenman seems to be reusing his own material (all I hear during the save the whales scene is MARCUS WELBY, and elsewhere, the Bakshi LORD OF THE RINGS), whereas Horner was just plain out plagiarizing other classical and film composers like crazy. Not saying other greats didn’t occasionally do the same, but they didn’t make a career out of it like Horner. His BATTLE BEYOND THE STARS score is pretty much a riff on several Goldsmith scores, and by the time of WOLFEN, he was using the same Prokofiev pieces again and again (heard in TWOK and COCOON and ALIENS – the latter which also somehow got nominated despite how derivative it was) … and the way he rips off a classical piece used in 2001 — the same piece, note for note and with almost the exact same arrangement — in ALIENS and CLEAR & PRESET DANGER — takes me out of those movies every time I watch them. His SOMETHING WICKED score is practically a low-key rendition of Williams EMPIRE theme, and his ROCKETEER, while catchy, seems to be a riff on Randy Newman’s THE NATURAL flavored with Conti’s THE RIGHT STUFF. (these are all off-the-top-of-my-head examples, I’m not researching any of this today.)
Horner did come up with what I THINK was an original piece of music for the 48HRS theme, but since he uses that throughout COMMANDO, GORKY PARK and pretty much every other then-contemporary action pic, he managed to run that into the ground pretty quick too.
I would have a horribly low impression of Horner if not for the fact that the stuff definitely sounds listenable (which giving who he is taking it from, is only reasonable) … the SNEAK ATTACK piece in TWOK and parts of the GENESIS COUNTDOWN are fantastic.
Comparing Horner to Goldsmith is like comparing Madonna’s AMERICAN PIE to the original — the remake is like a sin compared to the original.
Re: Chekov runs through a CLOUD BANK of atmosphere
You mean fog, for which San Francisco is notoriously plagued?
Didn’t happen in San Francisco. The scene in question took place in Alameda, where they keep the nuclear wessels, and which is not foggy like the City.
@The River Temarc
Actually it took place aboard the USS Enterprise CVN-65 (at least its stand in for the film), and was steam. Considering they were harvesting photons from a nuclear reactor system that uses huge amounts of water (A2W type reactors) you might want to re- examine your stance on whether it makes sense or not.
They steam the CORRIDORS? Didn’t see those levels in any other part of the ship. I always fall asleep on TVH, will try putting blu-ray in and jumping up to that part in morning to re-view, but don’t think it is my imagination, I’ve been making the same complaint for 30 years.
The River Temarc,
Here’s a shocker:
The date on that paper which appeared on screen in STIV says December 26, 1986 which means Chekov went to Alemeda that evening. Note the observation from Alameda NAS:
No, I’m saying INSIDE the carrier. There’s a wide shot where you are looking down a hall at a doorway, and as I recall Chekov runs by that, and it is like FLASHDANCE times about three — which is saying alot, since there is an awful lot of atmo on the BoP too.
CLEAR & PRESENT DANGER/PATRIOT GAMES was derivative of Aram Khachaturian’s ballet Gayane, not Prokofiev.
Horner was a great composer but incredibly derivative. There are cues in his Bicentennial Man & Braveheart scores which are identical!
GENERATIONS was the weakest, easily. Then STIV. Those two I disliked. After that, I’d probably say NEM, but I ultimately enjoyed NEM because of the closing credits theme (it was butchered in editing in the movie, but it’s on the CD), as well as the Battle of the Bassen Rift.
He did the theme but not the regular series music. Rick Berman commanded that Trek music be boring wallpaper since TNG Season 5, with some exception.
Goldsmith over Horner?!? Sure….
“In a pig’a eye.”
Dr. Leonard McCoy
STAR TREK BEYOND, 2016
The TMP score was fine, and I cherish his genius on many other films (POTA was pure genius), but it was a swing and a miss.
Horner’s TWOK deeply soulful, nautically-flavored, action packed score gave me everything TMP’s cold, overblown, insensitive a score couldn’t.
Dr. Doctor & Chuckunit,
There’s no accounting for taste, but regardless, I respect both composers, Horner and Goldsmith, as immensely talented. However, in my estimation Goldsmith was a smart worker who worked hard, and Horner worked smart and hardly worked. It’s subtle, but, for me, it’s why I prefer Goldsmith to Horner, but I enjoy them both.
Honestly I think comparing the scores for TMP and TWOK – the two best Star Trek scores – is like comparing Bach and Mozart. Both are perfect. Both evoke emotions and moods and are two of the ten greatest film scores in cinema history. I will honestly say that I prefer TMP but only by the slimmest of margins.
Amen to that! Goldsmith’s Motion Picture score is my all-time favorite soundtrack.
I for one am very glad they’re not sticking to the TOS look. We’ve got it in the movies, that’s good enough. Too many fans are hung up on everything matching and working in continuity. I think if the feel is right, and the spirit is right– and the stories are good– I am less concerned with visual continuity.
Story continuity is another matter. I am willing to give stories some leeway if they make the effort (like ENT’s Ferengi episode) and it’s fun to nitpick the errors and inconsistencies, but i’m not going to let them hamper my enjoyment. After all, there’ve been PLENTY of continuity errors within a single series and between concurrent shows, let alone between prequel’s and their predecessors.
I can clear this up. John Williams is UNDENIABLY the composer of the century. But Goldsmiths score for TMP is the greatest score (& theme) of all time! I play it in the car 2 or 3 times a week & never get sick of it and when I play the ST:TNG, ST:TFF, ST:FC, ST:INS or ST:N version of the theme I don’t even hear the same piece of music!
“Green Harvest”, huh? Bit of a play on the working title for Return of the Jedi; “Blue Harvest”, perhaps?
That’s what I thought. I like that little nod. :)
Is Nocholas Meyer just a writer? I didn’t see his name there. Don’t flame me, its a legit question. LOL
Yes he’s always just been a writer for the show.
I feel no interest or excitement when contemplating and reading about this series. The creators should have come up with a totally different, unique and new direction for the series, instead they just made slight variation from past TREK series. Just another exploring the galaxy retread in a starship. Of course I wish them all the best. I feel nothing at all. And this coming from a major fan. Truly sad.
I’m a long time fan and I feel the way you do. But don’t be discouraged. Who knows, this might be the best one in a long, long time. You can’t be too critical of what hasn’t even been filmed yet
hahaha sure. In a crappy time period, an abysmal ship design, and boring yawn Klingon rubbish. This parody prequel of TOS is going down the chute with the fandom faster than In To Darkness.
True. I’m just not sure why I’m not jacked up about it though. It’s bizarre in a way.
A lot of people feel that way but it still could be good! Yes I don’t like retreads either but we still don’t know how they will do it. Maybe it will surprise us but funny I just been arguing this issue on another article here, a lot of people feel like you for a reason. But at least give it a chance, all we can do. Its the first Trek show in over a decade and if we DO get another show set post Voyager this one has to succeed either way.
Oh. You can bet I will eventually give it a chance and check it out. As I stated, I’m a TREK fan, but I can wait for the DVD and Blu-ray collections. Just not a lot of fire in the belly to see it.
Oh sorry you weren’t saying you don’t like its a prequel you just don’t like the starship angle. OK I get you now. Yeah I understand your point but I think people still see Star Trek as a ship based show. DS9 obviously changed it up but I think to this day DS9 is not seen as successful as something like TNG because it was on a star base and its easily my favorite show. But yeah I too would like to see them do something unique again. It might happen some day but it was no way their first new show in a decade would change the formula that much but its not to say it will never happen again.
But I think the smart move would have been to change the formula. And not just doing so to be different. Investigating and going out exploring isn’t in vogue. It was in the 60s. And even in the Bush era. Now it’s about staying home and solving our own issues and problems. This is the Trump era. TREK producers and fans still don’t get it. Art reflects the era it’s produced in and vice versa. The thing to do was to design a new TREK series that reflected our world, just as TOS did in the 60s. That’s where my disappointment rest. To me it was obvious what they should have come up with. I’ve written this before and will repeat it again. TREK needed to take advantage of it’s entire fictional universe it has created and should have shown us areas and aspect of that universe never before focused on or seen, and relate that to our present world. Now, I read they are bring back Sarak. Sarak! Again, they are going backward. And TPTB wonder why TREKs fan have aged. This is why I’m not excited. This is why I’m truly sad.
They should of Done a Mirror Universe series.
“Should of” has no meaning whatsoever, as anyone who has finished middle school knows.
Zig Heil! Here comes the grammar Nazi!
It’s Seig Heil… just sayin. Man in the High Castle (I’m not a nazi…)
Jay Ley & Shatner’s Bassoon
That’s “Sieg Heil!”. I’m a student of history who’s old enough to actually be history now.
Perhaps s/he wanted to say, “should’ve.” Common error.
I agree with Wallace. I hold no ill will towards the new show…and I’ll give it a go…but I feel no excitement for it.
Once I see a few episodes, then I’ll know how I feel about it!
something very different from past star trek would not be star trek. it would be something else. what drew us to star trek is what keeps us there.
“I feel no interest or excitement when contemplating and reading about this series. The creators should have come up with a totally different, unique and new direction for the series, instead they just made slight variation from past TREK series. Just another exploring the galaxy retread in a starship. Of course I wish them all the best. I feel nothing at all. And this coming from a major fan. Truly sad.”
I think it would be cool to have a police or medical show set in the (original) Star Trek universe. Play it just like ER or Law and Order, but in Star Trek’s twenty-fourth century.
Unrelated, but it bugs me when they introduce in prequels species of aliens we’ve never seen before, like Lieutenant Saru in Discovery and Dr. Phlox in Enterprise. Why not use aliens whom we are familiar with? There are so many to choose from. And a lot of the aliens in the first Kelvinverse movie were ones we’d never seen before. I know, it’s an alternate timeline in which the Federation has encountered different aliens, but I don’t think if, say, a Cardassian had appeared in that movie that people would have said, “Hey, no familiar aliens — make up some new ones!”
“Unrelated, but it bugs me when they introduce in prequels species of aliens we’ve never seen before, like Lieutenant Saru in Discovery and Dr. Phlox in Enterprise. Why not use aliens whom we are familiar with? There are so many to choose from. And a lot of the aliens in the first Kelvinverse movie were ones we’d never seen before. I know, it’s an alternate timeline in which the Federation has encountered different aliens, but I don’t think if, say, a Cardassian had appeared in that movie that people would have said, “Hey, no familiar aliens — make up some new ones!””
Uh you do know the show will actually revolve around the Klingons right? And who said there won’t be other familiar aliens?? They haven’t even announced the rest of the cast yet, others could be Vulcans, Romulans, Ferengi, Andorians, etc we don’t know yet. And there will be plenty of episodes that will probably deal with aliens we know.
But the point of Star Trek is to present vast alien life and so every show has always had a new alien on the crew. This has been tradition with every show:
Voy- Talaxian and Ocampan
And this has been brought up before but why do people think a prequel can’t introduce a new race of people?? This is the most bizarre logic I ever heard. For example how many aliens did you see in TOS that you never saw in TNG or DS9. Did you ever see a Gorn on those shows? Or a Deltan? Or an Andorian? We never even saw a tribble until DS9. Star Trek is a big universe just because you never saw someone in another period doesn’t mean they never existed we simply didn’t see them on that show. There have been over a hundred of species we have been introduce now between the five shows and multiple films. In the Star Trek universe itself though there are probably thousands of species Starfleet has encountered by now.
Given CBS’s recent trend towards spinoffs and like shows I had figured it was only a matter of time before we got Starfleet JAG or CSI: Memory Alpha….
Cool ideas, but I shudder at the thought of being the writer who has to find hir way around the incredible forensic abilities of a tricorder. How can you make it a mystery if a tricorder can detail so much information? There are ways, but you’re “writing around” the tricorder. Trek has done a good job with courtroom dramas, except for that pesky Lie Detector on the witness chair in various TOS episodes.
Similar to the problem mystery writers have today with cellphones. Before they came along, central characters could get into trouble a lot more easily, increasing the suspense for the reader. It’s not prohibitive to a good mystery, it just makes them a bit more difficult to write.
I’d like to see a show with search and rescue of ships in space, too.
It would be interesting to spend time with various groups of Starfleet people from week to week in a rotating series of casts/settings.
You know, i feel the same way. I wish they had gone forward instead of backwards again. The current movies are still prequels eventhough its an alternate universe that takes place in the present time. Witg Nero screwing things up. They could have made the 1st season Discovery and the following seasons…different eras. But Trek have always been treated like crap by the powers that be. We’ll probably be waiting another 3 or 4 years before Star Trek 4 roles out.
By setting as a prequel they’re avoiding the whole timeline alteration from the first Abrams Trek since the events occur before the timeline diverged. Kind of a copout but I’ll watch anyway. I don’t see why they couldn’t have set it after the events of TNG/DSN/Voyager. There’s no reason why the events of those shows couldn’t still have occurred. The only major difference was the destruction of Vulcan. After all of that time New Vulcan would probably just be referred to as “Vulcan” anyway. Since the show would be aimed at a general audience, who wouldn’t care about timeline minutiae, they could still move into the future. Every new Trek TV series can’t just keep mining the pre-TOS period.
Actually Wadebran the Abrams films are set in a completely different universe so those movies have no real affect on stuff like TNG/DS9/Voyager. Actually funny you mentioned Vulcan which is in another universe but left out Romulus which actually DID get blown up in the primary universe. In other words Vulcan is fine in this universe but its Romulus in the 24th century that would actually have an effect since it is destroyed.
And yes thats what a lot of us wouldve loved to have seen is how did Romulus being destroyed affect the region? Did it become a TUC situation where Romulans and the Federation put aside their differences to become friends or did Romulans go the opposite way and went into isolation farther? It would be nice to know.
But the shows very much occur. Absolutely nothing changed with any of them. The only difference that happened as far as canon is in the 24th century Romulus blew up and Spock disappeared.
That sounds like a show I’d be far more interested in. I think, though, that copyrights between Paramount Trek and CBS Trek might come up. [shrug]
I hear you Marja, I think most people on these boards would’ve preferred that direction but my guess is they want it to play it safe and we get this instead.
A new Trek series is coming to television, and Bryan Fuller and Nicholas Meyer are writing episodes for it. How can you not be excited? If there was a disappointing teaser, maybe I could understand…
Only the initial episode is on tv. Subsequent episodes will be on CBS All Access Streaming service. If you don’t subscribe and pay for the service you won’t see any more episodes :-(
“How can you not be excited?”
For me, the disappointment comes from how the show will be delivered more than anything else. I’d like to see the show in high quality and on my TV. Not in crap quality or on my phone or laptop. It’s not even the pay aspect of it. It’s that it’s using a tech that is currently not as good as the more proven method.
I’m sort of afraid it will be worse or less interesting than exploring the galaxy. I’m hoping they don’t devolve to much into politics and war like Battlestar Galactic or the Star Wars prequels.
There are still more more unknowns than knowns here, so you’ll have to wait to find out whether the new series is really like you see it now.
Wow this is great news! Finally it truly begins. :)
But its kind of crazy a 9 month shoot for just 13 episodes? That can’t be right lol. Unless they take a break somewhere I assume the show will air without interruption and if so the entire season will have run by August the latest. Anyway I doubt it will be shot through September but its just great to hear its lifting off! Exciting news.
It’s just 7 and a half month.
Well OK if you want to get specific over the schedule but the issue is just the same because if its shooting through September that would imply the show wouldn’t end until October the earliest but it starts in May with a run of 13 episodes. So my point stands unless there will have to be a big break somewhere during the airing of the show and thats pretty uncommon for streaming sites. Usually they show a season uninterrupted but it may not mean that will necessarily happen. Just thinking out loud.
But don’t get me wrong, its good in the sense they aren’t rushing it and sounds like they are going to take their time to make each episode. Kind of funny how someone on another board was suggesting they were suppose to shoot it all before the premiere starts but this proves they plan to spread it out, even more so than most shows with a 13 episode season. Most of those shoot maybe 6 months.
Id rather we get 10 or 11 mini movies than 20 episodes with only abouth 5 or 10 really decent episodes. I love TNG but its one drawback was the number of clear and poor filler. Which affected all the Star Trek series. I hope this series can pull of a season of all good to great episodes. It has too it todays TV.
I wasn’t talking about the number of episodes, I was simply commenting that if the filming schedule is from January to September but yet the show starts in May then it sounds like they may not show the entire season without interruption. This is obviously common on network TV but its rare for streaming sites, thats all. But that may not be the case.
You see, I get something different out of the change of schedule: the screening of the show will be postponed again. Seems odd not to announce it, but a lot of the decision making around the series has been outside of the norm.
Working as I did on the fringes of Penny Dreadful, I was amazed at how quickly a fairly high production value show could be turned around between shooting and release. All the editing was done in an office below my own almost as soon as the footage was shot. In the case of any Trek series, though, I’m sure this would be much more difficult because of the amount of post production and special effects required. January to September for a 13 episode series sounds about right (PD ran for 8-10 episodes a season and took around 8 months to shoot), but even then, the show wasn’t aired until shooting had finished completely.
I would be happy with a feature length pilot episode in May followed by the other episodes in September. I think fans would be happy with that and the showrunners have time to finish the series properly without any rushing of effecta and what not..
I don’t think that would fly though. Why air a pilot and then the rest of the show months later? In that case just push the whole thing until later then.
You could be right. I really hope not though since it already sucks the show was suppose to premiere literally this month and we have to wait longer. Another delay would feel like a kick in the teeth but not the end of the world either.
But you’re right the beauty of TV is the turnaround is super fast. The only thing about shows like Star Trek is the heavy FX involve that slows down shows from being completed faster.
And as I said its not really the schedule that bothers me it just tells me IF the show is being shot until September then there will naturally have to be a interruption in the season which is just not common for streaming shows. But yes ALL Access is new and probably may do some things differently but same time they could lose people if they sporadically air it, especially since you have to pay month by month and that we know it will be serialized. Always one of the downfalls of serialized shows. It hooks people right away but if there is too much down time between episodes people do move on. It happens a lot on networks and why they have shifted show schedules in recent years to try and play them with no more than minimum interruption. And as much at it would suck it would probably be best to delay it when they can just play week to week and keep people invested. So we’ll see if its true or not.
PD was an incredible show in all respects. If you were in any way involved in it you can be proud of the accomplishment.
Thank you for saying so, but when I say “on the fringes”, it very much means that – I work in the accounts office of the company that provided the extras (while our office and its surrounds were also used for some of the shooting scenes, since our office is based in Ardmore Studios). I did get to see Eva Green in the lunch queue, and again outside her trailer fixing her undergarments (Victorian wedgies are the worst), and I did nearly accidentally tragically drive over Timothy Dalton, who is still an imposing figure at 70, neither of whom are aware of any of those events happening, I’m certain. I did speak to Damian Lewis, though, as he’s married to Helen McCrory, who starred in Penny. He wanted directions. I was pretty happy about that, as I am a huge fan of Band of Brothers. Another show we worked on, Ripper Street, is definitely worth a watch if the Victorian era is something that you’re interested in. It’s a lot grittier.
P Dunlop —
Ripper Street was fantastic. The first few episodes belied my fears that it would be all about Jack the Ripper redux. Great cast and great stories about a Victorian police precinct in the poor sector of London. Can’t wait to see more.
Seconded. We buy RIPPER ST blu-rays every year, and usually rewatch the previous seasons just before to be back up to full speed. First rate show. Managed to deliver an Elephant Man that was just as memorable as Mr. Hurt’s.
Even though this will run on CBS online (a streaming site), I think they plan to produce it like a conventional broadcast series where they start production 4-6 months before the first episode premieres, “airing” (posting) episodes weekly. I’m not sure if that weekly schedule will have breaks within it, like a regular broadcast title or if they will time episode premieres to anything external (like Sweeps week, for instance).
9 months is a generous amount of time, but I find that encouraging – if these things suck, it won’t be because nobody ponied up the time or dollars to make it happen. I just hope there are some real ideas involved.
No as I said I think its a good thing they are taking their time making the show. It means they care. People were initially worried by putting it on a streaming site they were just going to cut corners by making a bare bottom show like something you might find on Syfy (although that station do have some quality shows) and charge us for it.
But now that we know they are spending more than an average drama, hired real Trek and sci fi producers and taking their time to get it right this is all a plus. It doesn’t mean it will be good. You can still do all the right things and put out stuff people hate but its a sign in the right direction.
But the only problem if you delay episodes like you do on a basic network they could lose people, ie, subscriptions. 1-2 weeks it doesnt matter since you are paying a month. But anymore than that people could cancel. Not a lot but some. Streaming sites aren’t networks and so they have to find ways to keep them paying but if its not a long interruption it will probably be fine.
I would say when TNG and DS9 were in their prime, you’d get at LEAST 10-15 good episodes, with a minimum of 7 of those being truly excellent, and the other 7-8 being average.. The other 10 episodes of the season you’d get 7 or 8 that were mediocre but passable, with two or three stinkers.
Which if you think about it, is probably what we’ll get out of Discovery, but without the average, passable, or bad episodes.
In a way, I almost would prefer a full 26 episode order, if that’s going to be the case. I don’t mind passable episodes now and again, even if it’s just filler. A passable Trek episode is still more enjoyable to me than most of what’s on TV!
I think most Trek fans would prefer more episodes than less. We are greedy lol. But same time I think its probably better for the writers. People moan how hard it is just to get a solid well written 2 hour film. Imagine how crazy hard it is to come up with 25 episodes of a series a year? Its amazing we get as many good episodes that we do when you think about it. But it really forces the writers to come up with all these stories to the point of insanity. Its no secret how the first few seasons of TNG was a crazy rocky affair and it sometime showed in the show itself but it was trying push out all those episodes in a year when they were still trying to figure out the show and the characters. In other words they just had no time to breath.
Thats the real problem with TV, you are expected to hit the ground running with 20 episodes and you barely have time to figure out who the characters are that first year. You are clawing your way through. By the third season everything gets mellower because you have a system in place, you know the characters and have a rhythm. So it makes more sense for the first season to start off smaller and build up as you go, especially sci fi shows as complex as Star Trek.
I would like more episodes too to make it clear though but it doesn’t have to be 26. I think 18 would be a solid number per season. And that might happen if the first season is strong enough. And frankly because Brian Fuller isn’t in charge. He was the one to demand to do less episodes as possible but for all the reasons stated, less clutter and to come up with just strong episodes. All his shows runs about 12 episodes a season. I think American Gods, the show he had that forced him to resign from Discovery, will only have 10 episodes. He actually stated he only wanted that many for Discovery and just make a lean and tight season. And if you look at his other shows you see why. Thats why he’s so popular now, because he’s a good writer but he also don’t create shows that has 20+ episodes a year either and that automatically makes a huge difference.
But my guess is if Discovery hits big enough CBS will want more frankly because you need more to get people to keep paying for the service. If they had more shows would be one thing but with just a few new ones its going to be hard to sustain customers with so few shows and episodes on. So it may be a bigger order next season at least.
At least this way it will be canned sooner.
How is your theory they were suppose to shoot the entire show before the premiere ran working out for you Carboy. ;)
Yeah, told you.
And if you don’t want to watch it, fine, but you will be anyway so save the whining until you seen it.
The soundstages are booked on a 12 month basis, and was planned to have been shot by now, so if they want to renew for season 2 they can keep the sets in place and start shooting 12 months later. Where do you think they are going to go? Once main sets are built, especially complicated sets with massive electrical installations they remain until the day they are discarded.
The air date has just been put back indefinitely. Listen to the experts.
It might be that the production company hired the soundstages in September last year, when the show was going to be filmed. Maybe just 12 month lease
Maybe they are shooting two 13 episode seasons or perhaps they changed it to 16 episodes like The Walking Dead with a mid season delay.
That would be great Jeff but Fuller made it clear first season would only be 13 because they had already structured the entire story around 13 episodes. Sure they can order more but I highly doubt they would if the story is already set and outlined.
I would actually be OK with them pushing the show back a bit further, now that I know it’s actually happening. Take your time, get it right.
Shooting beginning next week also means we’ll probably see a teaser with actual footage fairly soon (maybe as early as February). If I were them, I’d postpone the show, and screen the pilot at SDCC and make a big deal about it– bring the cast, have a life-size bridge set on the show floor, etc.
Honestly I think they don’t really have a choice. One of the rumors of Bryan Fuller leaving the show is he supposedly asked for a longer delay and they said no and that it became the reality he just wouldn’t be able to deliver it by May. Now its just a rumor no one will probably really know but people have to remember CBS didn’t really pay for this show, Netflix foot most of the bill at least the first season and my guess is they are the ones saying they want this thing out ASAP now. Delaying four months is already a long time after you forked already over ten of millions I doubt they want it delayed any more and get it shot already.
And thats the problem with Hollywood today because they now set these dates for all these shows and movies way down the line and before they even written a single script yet or hired a director or a show runner and then shocking things don’t quite work out so they delay OR rush it just to get it out to the date promised making it an inferior product. But the other problems is when they make these dates, they aren’t just arbitrary place holders on a calendar, they have now promised a lot of stakeholders, distributors, merchandise vendors, etc so and so is coming out and every one on their end is now forking out their own money with the promise the product will be delivered on time. When its not people can lose money.
And my guess is its not a big deal now but Netflix is probably getting antsy if they delay it yet again. They have bent over backwards for this show more than they have any other show they have licensed and it looks bad you spent their money with a promise you’ll have it on a certain date but can’t deliver.
Netflix did not foot the bill. CBS paid for it, and the money Netflix paid is equal to what production costs were. Big difference. They were commited to paying for production even if Netflix hadn’t made an offer.
There’s no indication that Netflix has any say in production, when it kicks off, or when it will release.
All we know now is that, like a TV network paying a studio to air a film a year after it leaves the theater (deals made sometimes before a film’s release)–they’re simply paying to run it on Netflix whenever it comes out. Foreign networks and streaming services do this all the time.
SKY TV paid HBO to air Westworld, it doesn’t mean they paid for the show or had any say in the show’s production.
Regardless Netflix basically paid a huge sum of money for it and my guess is want to see that paying off sooner than later. And I didn’t say they had a say so much as they were probably promised when the show would air and was (rightfully) upset when it didn’t happen. If you live outside of America and have Netflix it was already advertised on the site Discovery was coming in January. Well that didn’t happen obviously but I highly doubt they would want it delayed yet again.
All I’m saying is its no way you’re going to see another delay at this point as CBS put out a press release the show would be shot in January for a May release. This is not a bad thing lol.
Re: they were probably promised when the show would air and was (rightfully) upset when it didn’t happen
Probably being the key word there. If they were, it’s CBS pushing to get it out on time, not Netflix. But no point in speculating, really, since we don’t know what the contract says. For all we know, it simply says Netflix will pay X dollars *when it becomes available for streaming*. Which I could very well see being the case. Netflix is doing very well, and part of why is putting quality over quantity. I’m sure if they heard that having it available June 1 would mean a lesser quality show, they’d more than happily wait. They didn’t get where they are buy rushing out mediocre quality programs.
Well looks like I was completely wrong lol. I come back here and the first thing it said is its delayed yet again. I’m not against it because I been saying all along its good they take their time and get it right but I know no one is happy its delayed again.
Well kids now that we know its going to be yet another delay this filming schedule suddenly makes perfect sense. I couldn’t really see (or believe) they would air the show in May but not have enough time to show all the episodes consecutively because being a new streaming site the last thing CBS wants is a big enough gap between episodes for people to cancel the service or spread it out too thin. They already lose viewers that way on free channels. Pay one could be worse..
But now if its just delayed just two months (if not more) will probably give them the time to make all the episodes by September but still being able to run it with the others without interruption. So I guess we shouldn’t be too shocked it got delayed looking at that schedule.
I had a dream last night that I watched this series, and it was probably the most exciting 8 hours of sleep of my life. The show was action packed, had breathtaking effects, and characters who were a lot grittier and realer than we’ve seen in past Trek — although curiously there weren’t any aliens in my dream version…anyway it reminded me of Game of Thrones Trek, which is exactly the kinda thing I think we need for 21st century television
Here’s hoping we get some new visuals soon. Anything to clean out my mental image of silver and bronze art (titles and that ugly [hopefully] WIP ship).
I would love to see a Trek verse with realistic (dangerous) limits, like early TOS had; no zooming between planets in mere hours or reading all life in a sector with one glance at a sensor. We are ‘boldly going,’ which means we may get our ballet pants-encased asses handed to us once in a while.
TOS sucks though
Let’s hope Q WHO and ERRAND OF MERCY are mandatory re-viewings for the whole staff, to put CmdrR’s comments in the proper context. We ain’t always the perfect people (ever, actually), and the series, if it is going to connect AND deliver the goods, needs to keep that in mind.
Yawn Trek: Your Dad’s Generation re-begins.
My captain could beat up your captain.
Your captain is dead. I see why you want a prequel. Enjoy your Star Trek: The Last Generation while average viewership rapidly drops like dead flies.
Stop being a troll and go and use that thing at the front of your house called a door and get a life.
Nobody gives a crap about your trolling.
Carboy you might have changed your name but the whining is still the same. You’re on Trekcore as well with the same moaning about this show. Other people said it, grow up. We get it, you don’t want a prequel, get in line, but stop wishing it death just because you didn’t get your way. It may actually be good. But you just come off like a troll here. No one is saying you can’t be critical but stop being a baby about it, jeesh.
Carboy, I feel sorry for you. Such a sad little troll, desperate for some attention. Well, here you go–a little attention. Do you feel validated now? Or, like most trolls, are you really hoping for a fight because it’s the only excitement in your scared, little life?
Nobody is going to take your bait here. Nobody cares about your pointless barking. Grow up or move along, troll.
Carboy must be a Millennial. That means’ he’ll lose interest and be looking at something on Instagram or Facebook before the last of the opening credits has appeared on screen.
Born in 81 mate, grew up with quality trek, not prequels of a show I have zero interest in.
So you only like TV shows that are based on previous TV shows you loved? That’s weird.
The way you moan here man its like you’re born in 2001.
I wonder if they’ve casted the Captain of the Discovery? We’ve heard nothing.
LOL so true. I didn’t even think about that. In fact there are quite a few casts we haven’t heard about: Doctor, engineer, security officer, etc assuming they will have main characters for these roles. Yeah the casting announcement is quite odd. My guess though with filming now in place they have the rest of the cast and will announce soon. So should be an interesting few weeks.
Yes they have. The girl who plays Sasha on walking dead is the captain. No joke.
she’s not the captain (at first anyway), she’s the exec, I think.
No not the Captain. She’s playing a Lt. Commander. We still don’t know who the Captain will be.
Presumably that’s Michelle Yeoh’s character: Captain Georgiou.
Yeoh’s Georgiou is captain of the Shenzhou, not the Discovery.
I just saw Michelle Yeoh in the last season of Strike Back. She was evil!
“casted”? Oh, Shill…
According to the announcement they have Guillermo Navarro as director or photography. Based on his IMDB entry he has done more than 40 movies (including several big blockbusters) but has never shot a TV series. The 2nd listed DOP has done a lot of TV so I’m wondering if Navarro is just some kind of “visual consultant” or will indeed work hands-on on the show. Let’s hope for some interesting cinematography.
I’ve interviewed Navarro once, about I AM NUMBER FOUR. He’s an interesting choice, given PAN’S LABYRINTH and many other projects, and getting him would be a major coup. The other DP has done a lot of tv — and some genre stuff at that — so I’m thinking he might be the regular DP, taking over post-pilot from Navarro. Had been thinking the HANNIBAL and yr1 MAN IN HIGH CASTLE DP was going to shoot this series, but maybe that wasn’t in the cards.
Shows often have one DP shoot the pilot to set the look of the show, and another for the main run. So this would seem to fit that paradigm.
Wow. Very very good news.
I can’t wait to see some set photos. I wonder what the bridge will look like. How colorful will the nuniforms be. I really hope they resemblethe one from Beyonds. Even though they probably will not. Will the Klingons have the cranial ridges please say they will so pumped for this show.
That is one thing thats always exciting about a new Star Trek project and how the world around them will look. Especially things like the bridge, uniforms, aliens etc. I remember the first KT film was being made there was so much build up just wanting to know what an updated TOS world would look like and we got our answer lol. It was night and day from the show and that was in a good way IMO even if it maybe felt too flashy. But everyone wanted to know what the Enterprise would look like.
As for Discovery its no secret most people hated the ship (got it was ugly) and we already been told there were some changes. I think thats what people want to see most, how the ship has been changed. Hopefully thats one of the things we see first. And yes more than likely the Klingons will have ridges and its canon for them to have ridges anyway since Enterprise explained that you have both sets of Klingons and why.
well, judging by the end of Enterprise, they should all still be running about in blue overalls. That’s the trouble with jamming a prequel in to a confined space.
Blue overalls, aren’t any sort of argument for anything. Fashion always goes through cycles and recycles things. I’ve lived through denim being popular and then so popular that worn out denim, of all things, became more fashionable.
A blue overalls fad in uniforms, especially in an outfit that fancies itself as Naval in origins, can exist in either the past OR future.
@Carboy – with creativity like that Im surprised you’re able to turn on a computer.
Within canon, the uniforms should be the same as The Cage. But if this is a special asignment or something of that ilk, they could create an in-universe reason for something different.
Uh the last episode in Enterprise was still nearly a century before this show takes place so you’re clearly wrong on that.
And look at TOS itself. They had 3 very different uniform changes in the 25 years. You had the TOS 60s look. The sleek one piece look in TMP and then the more military type uniforms from through the rest of the series beginning with WOK.
In other words Discovery can be anything they want it to be since its set an entire decade before TOS although yeah I guess The Cage kind of makes it canon they would be in the earlier TOS uniforms but I would be shocked they kept those since they looked so cheap but might update them I guess like the KT films updated the TOS look.
Probably should have blanked out those phone numbers and email address.
Why? Those are business contact numbers and a business email address. That information is listed on the website this article mentions, which is a website filled with contact information for current productions. It’s not secret information. Nothing to blank out.
Does anyone know whether seasons (assuming there are more than one) will be released on home video and/or the iTunes Store? I don’t know how the streaming business model works, so I don’t know if CBS’s making their content available outside of CBS would be a dumb or unprofitable move for them.
Also, when I first got Netflix, I didn’t know that the setup was “watch whatever you want to watch, when you want to watch it”; I thought the programming was scheduling-based, where you had to watch something when it was being shown. Does CBS All Access work like Netflix — you’ll be able to turn it on and watch Discovery whenever you want? Will you be able to view older episodes, like, make your own reruns?
All my answers is just speculation but yes it will more than likely be released on DVD/Blu Ray in time since every show on CBS are, at least the popular ones. Wouldn’t be until months later after the season aired though. I can’t say anything about the Itunes store since I never used it but my guess is they want to try and get everyone to stream it on All Access in the beginning so I wouldn’t count on it right away at least.
And again, speculation but yes you should be able to watch whatever episode is on when you want to watch. Thats currently done for every streaming site out there including All Access now. There is some talk among people CBS will try to limit that in some way so people can’t binge watch it later or something but I can’t see how that would remotely work and it would stop people from signing up. Thats the point of streaming sites that you can watch something anytime all the time once it airs there. And All Access will be competing with all these other sites that does this including Netflix who run the show in basically every other part of the world. If CBS tries to pull the show from people being able to watch anytime while you are freely allowed to on Netflix people will be calling foul on it and it will be a mess. So there is no upside for them to do that outside of greed and I don’t see them trying to do it. If you wanted to do that then you could’ve just aired the show on normal TV where reruns ARE becoming rare thanks to all the streaming deals.
I am all for more Trek, but did we really need another prequel series after Enterprise ? They could have gone forward to the 26th-30th century. Give us The Uss Enterprise G, H or I.
I seriously am over Enterprise as a ship name. Must every Trek series be set on an Enterprise? I’m glad they’re showing some originality. There are plenty of other majestic names out there. Discovery isn’t the one I would’ve gone with, but at least it isn’t Enterprise-X
You mean every 3 out of 5 Trek series?
In retrospect, if they had kept the actual ship the same over multiple generations, you’d have a unique “character”. Ofcourse that would never work in modern TV/films. But it would be neat.
I suspect we might eventually get a stunt casting of the Enterprise in Discovery. Its just too obvious. If they needed to bring the NX-01 out of mothballs for some reason, I wouldnt be upset. If the story is interesting…
I think most people would’ve loved that too. They already tried it with Enterprise, look how well that turned out? It doesn’t have to be set on Enterprise or even a Starship but yeah go forward already. Prequels just doesn’t excite people. You can look at the BO for The Force Awakens and then the BO for Rogue One get really understand that. Rehashing things we already know just in a different package just has its limits.
THAT said though I think Discovery might really surprise us and they are trying to do something different so I’m actually excited about it. But I would be MORE excited if it took place post Voyager. Most would.
“You can look at the BO for The Force Awakens and then the BO for Rogue One”
Not really a good comparison. Force Awakens brought back many of the original trilogy characters in a big way, with Han, Chewy and the Millenium Falcon prominent in advertising. Rogue One was an all-new cast (though there were a few unadvertised cameos.)
I agree but still its a prequel about an ending everyone already knows happened. It wouldn’t make as much money regardless. No one had a clue where TFA was going and that alone will just be more exciting.
Rogue One was NEVER going to top TFA. It’s almost at a billion dollars worldwide so hard to say that it being a prequel drove people away. A billion dollar movie is a success in anyone’s book. The difference is Rogue One was a prequel done right with no Jar Jar or midiclorians to be seen.
Uh I never said it wasn’t a success I was only saying it doesn’t bring the same interest as TFA for obvious reasons, one for being mostly a filler story vs TFA which is yes bringing back old characters but also expanding the story in a big way. RO WAS a prequel done right but its still doesn’t bring the excitement to a story that is wide open like the sequel trilogy. Thats my only point.
Re: … it being a prequel drove people away.
Nah, it’s more likely it was because TFA had a lot more curiosity factor regarding exactly how Disney’s STAR WARS would be done and besides, it always amazes me that people forget or get confused that no matter what SW era they choose, its all in our PAST.
After TFA, the bloom was off the rose for this gawker faction, for lack of a better word, and they would likely NOT show up for the next film no matter what, after having their curiosity sated.
The problem with TFA is that it just rehashed too much of ANH. I think the film is well made and entertaining with its own mythology but it still played it WAY too safe IMO. That said everyone seems even MORE excited for Episode 8 because it sounds like we are going to get something we haven’t in the first two Disney films: An actual original story that doesn’t just feed on nostalgia but goes its own way. Another problem I have with prequels, too much nostalgia for them to work. But if Episode 8 doesn’t just mimic Empire and be good that will be the right start finally.
Personally I enjoyed Rogue One a little more than I did TFA. TFA spent time “covering bases”. And Leia ignored Chewie! [snif]
If I never see or hear the words “Death Star” in SWars again, I will be quite happy.
I preferred TFA. Rogue One was a technically flawed film and I can only imagine how poor it was before the extensive re-writes and re-shoots. Im a nobody and I immediately saw ways to improve the story, pacing and structure.
Having said that, where Rogue One succeeded and STID (for example) failed is that it was enjoyable. I can see the flaws and I can see where it could be better but it was an enjoyable ride.
Comparing box office of TFA to RO is the silliest anti-prequel argument I’ve read thus far. “This gigantic pile of money is larger than this gigantic pile of money so the smaller but still gigantic pile isnt that valuable.” sheesh
What excites YOU doesnt matter.
Its not meant to be an ‘anti-prequel argument’ it just shows the difference of one set of films vs another. RO was a really good film, I liked it better than TFA in fact but it was also just filler. There was NO reason to make it outside of Disney wanted to try and relive ANH in some way and thats what this was. It told its own story but there is absolutely nothing in it that *needed* to be told. It was just background information at the end of the day on things we mostly knew about. The only real thing we didn’t know about was that the Death Star was given a flaw on purpose to make it easier to blow up and we all know that was just a retcon. A good one though but still a retcon.
My ONLY point is obvious: People probably like RO but it really offered nothing new in terms of story and basically very limited compared to TFA that is building on something new and that excites people. This isn’t rocket science. RO is a nice side story but thats all it is, a SIDE story. It doesn’t build on the mythos in any real way and thats what SW fans like. TFA meanwhile created new story lines and characters that will probably go on for a long time. You can certainly like RO better than TFA as I just said I myself did but its no way a RO trilogy would be more exciting for fans than the sequel trilogy. Thats just the reality because prequels will never be as exciting as sequels. I can’t think of ONE prequel series in terms of films or TV that was more exciting than the resource material it was based on. If someone can tell me one, great, and I can tell you five that wasn’t.
Disney clearly knows that because there is literally a billion dollar difference between the two. But that said no one here said RO isn’t successful or that it was supposed to do more. No in FACT I think it did exactly what it was expected FOR being a prequel. Its quite amazing it did as well as it did in fact. A billion dollars is still crazy money lol.
You know what’s funny? The people behind GoT are discussing a spin off and the quote is something like “Probably not a spin off, something even better – a Prequel” and they go on to talk about the rich world of GoT and how they want to play in that world and thus, a prequel.
This “prequels are bad” schtick is dead. Lets move on.
And yes on the other side of that coin plenty of GoT fans are AGAINST the idea as well and not happy it could prequel. But to be fair a lot of them sound like they just think the story should just end period since it just followed the books and think HBO is being greedy. But they will all watch lol and HBO knows that. But a lot of fans aren’t jumping and down over the idea of another show either. And as I said I was asking what prequel series has actually been considered better? That was my real question and I can’t think of any thats been better than their source material. Doesn’t mean they are ‘bad’ either and as I pointed out I liked stuff like RO a lot, but its few and far between which I think are actually really good. I watch Better Call Saul but honestly if it wasn’t a prequel to Breaking Bad I don’t think that show would’ve lasted more than a season.
And no will be ‘moving on’ because people have the right to express what they want. Its not a schtick man many people simply don’t like the idea just because you do. You are more than welcome to disagree with them or just ignore it but every board I go to this show being a prequel is still one of the biggest issues with many people, this board very being a very good example. That said as usual if its a good show that will go away in time. Right now its just people basing on what they know thus far and little else.
Yes but the anti-prequel crowd acts like its a forgone conclusion that prequel=bad. Its not true. Bad is bad. Good is good. It doesnt matter if its Star Trek set in 1991 or 2950.
I’ve explained my desire for something that takes place within the established canon but those that want it post Nemesis havent been able to explain why beyond “go forward”. Going forward in time means nothing. Going forward in story telling does not specify a time period.
Well clearly *I’m* not saying that as I said I’m not only excited about Discovery but have faith it will be very good given the people who will be making it.
Although I’m not sure how you have missed why people want a post Nemesis show, they want to simply see what happens down the line given where the state of the universe was after the Dominion war has ended. I even said it here with Romulous now destroyed it would be interesting to see how much the region has changed over it and where the Federation is because of that. They could build an entire show around that if they chose to.
This is just normal, most people want to see new things they never seen before. When you do a prequel the universe is already set, you already know whats coming overall. You put it in an unknown era you have a very different dynamic, one where anything can happen ala DS9. But that said they surprised us a few times on Enterprise with the Xindi so we’ll just have to see. I’m holding out it will be a new angle that keeps it fresh and unpredictable but I go back to my Rogue One analogy. Although I finally saw the film and liked it it was not something I had to see right away and in fact didn’t until 3 weeks later because I knew how it was going to end and not something I *had* to right away although end of the day I did really like it.
Episode 8 however I will be there opening weekend.
Rogue One was good because it was an independent short story about sacrifice and hope in the SWars universe. [And I loved Alan Tudyk as the bitchin’ droid!] It came without a lot of mythos-you-gotta-know-to-get-the-whole-story. That’s part of what I liked about it; it wasn’t weighed down. And it didn’t rehash ANH the way TFA did.
That said, I do look forward to seeing more of dynamic, faithful Rey and sad, sad, Kylo.
“It came without a lot of mythos-you-gotta-know-to-get-the-whole-story.”
True, but I think that is part of the problem why its not doing that well in China. All the reviews I hear about it is that its boring a lot of people there because if you never watched ANH it feels like this disconnected film to a lot of people. I mean the story itself is fine but the problem is the ‘resolution’ isn’t really until you watch ANH and since all of us know ANH its not an issue. But thats part of the issues with prequels you still have to be familiar with the source material in some way to care.
I’m not putting the film down I’m only saying it only really works if you watch ANH. If you never watched that its a two hour movie of getting some plans that ends with them escaping with the plans and nothing else. Why it feels like a side story because we know what happen to the characters in it but the ending might as well just said ‘To be continued…” because it doesn’t feel like a real ending without the other film in your head. And thats actually part of the problem. Not a huge one but one if you only seen this film in the franchise.
But I agree with you it at least told its own original story unlike TFA which felt too much like ANH or at least taking all the elements of ANH to form their story. I’m still very interested in Episode 8 but honestly its going to start boring people if Disney just want to rehash the OT every type of way and why there are moans about the Han Solo film. Again I don’t want to give the people the idea I just loath prequels, I don’t when they do something interesting with them but its too far and inbetween and it just feels like an excuse sometimes to throw in a lot of fan service and nostalgia which frankly both TFA and RO did plenty of. Again, fine, but if they are still pulling this act 3 films from now its going to feel tired. I hope they get it out of their system after the Solo movie and REALLY go forward and make the universe beyond Skywalkers and Death Stars.
Wow, look at me nerd it up about Star Wars on a Trek board lol. I can’t blame anyone if I get banned over it. ;)
Yes, I agree that its better if you know A New Hope. But watching Bourne 2 is better if you saw Bourne 1. Its a franchise. That’s the struggle, to create a story that can attract new viewers who will then seek out the rest of the franchise versus serving those that know every intimate detail.
Its what JJ and Co. did somewhat well in Trek 09 and failed miserably to do in STID.
That’s what I hoped for, too. And now we’re getting to see more of the history of the future. But I remain open-minded and optimistic about it since it’s hopefully the traditional Trek, not some brainless reboot crap like those awful movies.
I wish the series much success but i have my doubts as I’ve not been a fan of recent movies. Star Trek is best left alone, its most painful to watch them screw with the recipe. The timeline seems important to me, and they picked the wrong timeline here. I’m so done with prequels. Its so easy for writers to miss something and create a script that challenges cannon. Its much easier for a post voyager time frame, anything can happen. That was my issue with Enterprise. Borg, Ferengi, and don’t get me started on time travel. It almost comes across as desperate vs creative. This new series might have these same issues. The CBSONLINE element also creates its only challenges. I won’t be paying for the service. I’ll wait for it to be on Kodi.
They should absolutely “screw with the recipe”. No one wants warmed over hash from the 60’s anymore.
Harry, don’t speak for me. Thanks.
Ok, mark Ted C down for 50 year old warmed over hash. I’m ordering a pizza.
Forgive me, but I don’t think I’m going to let you pick the wine.
Red wine with fish – should have known!
Oh you don’t know what your missing.
Mark Harry down for “doesnt know what he’s talking about”. Save room for seconds Harry. And some humble pie.
Cue lame attempt at an insulting comeback…
humble pie is delicious with chocolate milk, I don’t know why people don’t like it. I’m not going to insult you TUP, that would be childish. You’re way to clever for that anyway.
“You’re way to clever for that anyway.”
@Harry – This is true. Thank you.
Re: warmed over hash from the 60’s anymore
The only people capable of doing anything close to that are writers that were actually alive during the 60s as no such “recipe” actually exists. And the only ones of the films for which none of the writers were, are the Bad Robot films which were all prequels whether or not they took place in an alternate universe.
Thats my biggest disappointment too, I just don’t care about the timeline. If they didn’t want to go post Voyager fine but I think it would’ve been way more interesting to have a post TUC timeline as once rumored because we still don’t know a great a deal about this period and it would still be 80 years before TNG at least. But it is what it is.
And yes also agreed a post Voyager show would just make their job so much easier. When Enterprise was made at the time it did make a lot of sense why the wanted to go back, especially because it was the same team who had created so much of the 24th century shows so frankly they were just out of ideas of how to keep going forward and probably wanted to do something different. But its been over a decade now and there are lots of people today who probably have a lot of amazing ideas of what could be next but they want to stick to whats safer I guess. I certainly hope we get a better show than Enterprise (even though I have grown to like it now) but I won’t be surprise if they fall into the same trap that show did and if it does then maybe it should tell them making a prequel series is just not as easy as hoped. But hopefully they won’t.
Can’t wait, I’m sick of seeing Star Wars and Marvel everywhere!!!
They’re everywhere because they’re popular. Star Trek is not. Trek needs to appeal to mass audiences to succeed and be “everywhere”. This is why I’ve always argued you can’t rely on TOS ways of doing things. Trek needs to be exciting and action packed in addition to having compelling stories. People sitting on a bridge set debating Romulan politics ain’t cutting it nowadays. Deal with it.
And it has to be “everywhere” why exactly? I do not understand the reasoning. Marvel and Star Wars are mostly formulaic movie franchises with a teenager target audience and with a couple tv shows for kids. I can only speak for myself, but I rarely watch those things. Why would Star Trek, traditionally aimed at college-educated audiences, change its fundamental concept? Especially in a time when the tv market does not need (or even get) mass audiences anymore, when more and more tv shows are being taylored to specific audiences. Take into account that production costs of scifi have dropped, relatively speaking, there is no business reason for changing to full action and cutting “intellectual stuff”. Star Trek shows have rather been pioneers of the current model, which is why they still work so well and are among the most-watched shows on streaming sites.
Now, the movies are a different matter, and Paramount has decided to go the Marvel route, but I was referring to Star Trek as a tv show, which is a completely different market. I want great stories with drama and characters and also action, but I want politics and ideas to make me think as well.
Re: Why would Star Trek… change its fundamental concept?
I agree. I mean good gawd Plinkett, more is rarely better. And SW and Marvel being more popular is not analogous to STAR TREK being UNPOPULAR. We wouldn’t be here typing about if THAT were true.
It’s getting there. Star Trek is 50 years old and the old guard fans don’t want it to change. Frankly the old guard of fan is getting old and will soon die. Yep, lots of dead Trek fans of the original show soon feeding the worms. So if the show is to continue for decades to come, it has to appeal to fans who didn’t get high at Woodstock.
Get some help.
Perfect reason I hate Trek fans right here DanNB – Star Wars and Marvel is targeted to teens while Star Trek is targeted to college educated intellectuals. Get out of here with that nonsense. I’m college educated, 47 years old, and I love Star Wars and Marvel. I don’t need science fiction to intellectually stimulate me. Perhaps others do. I read for that, I go to lectures for that. I study for that and if I do want a good deep sci-fi movie I’ll watch 2001, Arrival or The Martian, not TMP or Undiscovered Country.
City on the Edge of Forever is a great episode because it has great characters and a great story, not because it “makes you think” or is “intellectual”. Other so called greats like Let this be your last Battlefield is just an obvious heavy handed in your face racism tale. Nothing “intellectual” about it. Trek fans need to put away this superiority complex. Your intellect comes from what you learn in life, not what some bad actor like Shatner scenery chews in some goofy 60’s tv show.
Harry Plinkett, I am sorry if that seemed arrogant or offensive, that was not my intention. Since TOS the show had a strong appeal to the college crowd and beyond, that is all I am saying, people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, while blockbuster movies are geared towards teens, because they are the ones still going to theaters, it is a marketing thing. That does not change that both are being watched by many people, older, younger, all kinds of education or backgrounds. My girlfriend (college student) loves Marvel movies and the fantasy genre, but she does not watch Star Trek (except the new movies), because she wants escapism and not her class topics discussed in her shows. That is ok, but I have a different taste, I loved TNG because they collectively dissected problems and not just acted only to make dramatic mistakes (although I know the conferences are not the most beloved devices of that show). Yeah, I want my nerd entertainment. :-)
But I should be more precise: If they do Star Trek in the dramatic scope and script quality of Game of Thrones, that obviously would take Trek up a notch. Just don’t forget suspension of disbelief and high-concept stuff, make it scifi (and yes, my favorite episodes are those with a scifi premise reminiscent of 2001 et al). Like I said, I can only say what Star Trek means to me, I might be in the minority.
“I’m college educated,”
Wonders never cease.
The problem Harry is that you’re one of those angry Trek fans that covers your ears and yells na na na na na I cant hear you while stomping your feet and demanding a film or tv show that appeals only to you.
Discovery will stand or fall on its own merits. The fact you cant stand traditional Trek is a failure of you, not of the people responsible for its creation.
Interesting, I didn’t realize that my inclination to dislike traditional Trek is a failure on my part. I guess my college education isn’t as extensive as yours TUP because I’ve never heard of this reasoning before. I guess I better get with the program so I’m not deemed a failure by your ilk because that would just hurt my feelings.
It’s okay you didn’t realize your inclination was a failing on your part, because WE did. College education doesn’t have a thing to do with it, however.
Just so I’m clear kmart – the fact that I dislike traditional Trek is counted as a “failure” on my part? This your stance? Your contention? Wow you have a mind like a steel trap. I’ll bet your family makes you wear protective gear when you go outside so you don’t hurt yourself.
No Plinkett, that’s not my stance – I was just going for a cheap laugh at your expense. Figured it was giving you EXACTLY what you’re worth.
Wow. I can’t say that I agree with your dislike of TOS, Harry, but I think you’re getting dumped on in this conversation, which I also don’t agree with and I don’t think you deserve. Nothing I’ve read from you in this thread deserves the kind of response you are getting.
Just because you don’t have the same affection for one iteration of Trek, doesn’t mean that you are somehow deficient as a human being – unless that supposed to be sarcasm, Kmart; it’s so hard to tell in print. Nevertheless, it makes for tiresome reading. What are we, a bunch of 4th graders that we can’t have an exchange of opinions without insulting each other?
Star Trek fans are some of the worst people, honestly. Makes me embarrassed to come here, let alone identify myself as one. Maybe I’ll take a break.
nscates, Plinkett has been striking me as obnoxious for awhile now, and reveling in said obnoxiousness. Nowhere near as bad as that Axanar and Cushman apologist, but even so …
Harry is the most obnoxious poster on here since a certain poster with a *ahem* rosy disposition took a vacation.
No Harry, your issue isnt that you dislike TOS, its your distain for those that do like it. And also your dislike seems rooted in irrational things. Like perhaps you didnt love it but now you’ve dug your heels in and convinced yourself you hate it, just to be contrary.
If you watched any of Marvel’s Netflix shows you would know nothing about them is ‘for kids’. They are very mature, gritty and dark shows actually made for adults with complex story lines. Jessica Jones story line for example was about sexual abuse and obsession. The films are aimed for teenagers for sure obviously which is fine since most comics are made more for them.
Star Wars has always been more family driven. I wouldn’t say it was for kids but certainly aimed younger. But of course all the people who grew up on it are now older and still like it even if they had problems with the later films but one thing I find fascinating about Star Wars is its never lost its fan base. For ALL the moaning about the prequels and now some about the Disney films the fan base is still as strong as ever. They continue to whine but continue to show up opening weekend in large numbers just the same. Now that may change with so many more films but I suspect like Marvel if the films stay good they will keep showing up for a long time.
Star Trek however has always been so much harder to define. Everyone knows its popular, there is a reason there are so many sites devoted to it like this one, but the issue is its never reached over to tap the main stream audiences like those other franchises. When it was at its biggest in the 90s with TNG and the later spin offs and Trek felt like it was everywhere back then it did feel like it hit a fever pitch with its fan base and actually bringing a lot of new people who didn’t like Trek before when it was just TOS. So it did bring in lots of new fans for sure but it was still muted compared to bigger franchises. The TV shows were definitely a hit though but you had to be a Star Trek fan to care still.
But I agree I think the shows have always been more adult fare and happy they basically stayed that way. It doesnt mean kids can’t watch it, I was a teenager when TNG came on but I mean is it wasn’t TRYING to reach kids like Star Wars and Marvel does. It wasn’t trying to ‘dumb it down’ for any demographic and thats what kept the masses away but it also what kept the audience it did have so devoted to it. Star Trek is really about ideas. I don’t say that in a pretentious way but it really tried to say something about our world and who we are. SW did that too but on more superficial level. Its themes are important but more spiritual mixed with a WW 2 back drop just all set in space. Its not about issues of the day or where we are going as a race like Trek is and why I enjoy Trek more.
But I don’t think its ever going to be as popular as those. The KT films tried and for a short time it look it was possible but I have a feeling any more of those films will always just fall into ‘decent but not amazing’ BO no matter what they do. Discovery could be a hit but ‘hit’ is relative. We don’t even know what the target viewing CBS wants and my guess no matter what it will still be a lot lower than TNG and DS9 viewing was 20 years ago. But if its good enough to keep it on and a benefit for All Access all that matters. Star Trek will always be popular but it will never be mainstream enough to be like those others. And it doesnt need to frankly. It just needs to be good and stay true to itself, ie, adult.
Trek was not aimed at “college-educated” audiences. Cripes. It was [for the most part] intelligently written, and drew intelligent people into its future universe.
It INSPIRED many intelligent kids to achieve the grades to go to college, and yes, intelligent people of all stripes liked it, including the college-educated ones.
Oh gee, I should not have said “college-educated”, just “college-aged and older” or something like that. Obviously I was talking about marketing and target audiences, nothing more. I myself started watching Star Trek with my father when I was not even ten years old. I did not understand everything, and I discovered more and more layers many years later, so it had a lasting value. And your are right, it inspired me early on.
Nevertheless, since everyone keeps referring to TOS: A couple of years ago I stumbled across the correspondence between Gene Roddenberry and Willy Ley, a German-American science journalist and scientific adviser influential in the 1950s, 60s. And they talk about how they are creating the first adult scifi show on television, diverting from the Lost in Space recipe and all the shows for kids. They tried to get established scifi writers such as Heinlein to appeal to sf fan clubs, in those times consisting of young engineers and scientists (some of them NASA, MIT, Caltech) in their 20s, 30s, with a lot of influence over that subculture. And yes, a major goal was to get kids interested in serious scifi via television as well. But serious science fiction meant that it appealed to both groups, that it gained respect among experts and was not just a money-machine, but developed cultural significance. If it worked back then, when it was a much bigger gamble, it should work now within a much more relaxed streaming market. Make it scifi.
Tiger2: You are right, I have not seen the Marvel Netflix shows, should do it some time, sounds good.
If you think the Marvel shows on Netflix are for kids then you know absolutely nothing about them. They are NOT kid stuff, unless you want kids having nightmares about mind controlling rapists, brutal crime lords known for decapitating people with car doors, & more.
Wow. Talk about missing your original premiere date. Not only did they miss it, but they didn’t even start shooting until after it. I bet whoever set that date is proud of that one.
Does this mean sets are built? Or is this going to be the location shooting start date?
Sets have been built since October.
They’ve been working on sets for a while I think. Bryan Fuller posted this back in July of what looks like could be a captain’s chair.
Can’t wait for this to be out. Yes, I will be there with my $6 a month to watch this. Been without real Star Trek for a long time. I really hope it does well.
I am curious if they are going to update the technology. I really think it Is time that they move beyond communicators and tricorders, since we pretty much have that tech now. I am curious how they will handle that, especially being a prequel.
They can’t, they’re locked into the prequel time period. It can only be a rehash of flippy communicators. We’ll be lucky if the ships have shields, likely limited to warp 7, might even get a tractor beam if you’re lucky.
We’re stuck with a pre TOS rehash now, it doesn’t bode well for writing staff who will have to figure out how to make Kirk era handheld computers look even less developed, while half of the art department will be walking around with ipads.
It’s a ridiculous time period to have chosen.
You’re just demonstrating a failure of imagination. The tools don’t make the show, and trappings are just that, unless you’re Ridley Scott on a good day, which Trek has never been.
Also, tech advances aren’t linear – I remember a TOS era novel MEMORY PRIME, with Ent crewmembers explaining why the equipment on the ship is so bulky when miniaturization was so widespread and it was a pretty good techbabble about these older consoles withstanding phasers frying better than the newer small stuff. The Reeves-Stevenses should have been writing TREK tv in the 90s, not the 2000s when it was too late.
Just end this new series with a “Galactic Apocalypse” or some tech destroying event and then the TOS tech is what is rebuilt from the ashes. Just need a way to explain the TOS design / color scheme. Then of course we’d all be wondering why this Apocalypse was never mentioned before….
When did you see the pilot episode Carboy?
Yes I fully intend to have my $6 too with bells on! :)
But yeah the technology will definitely be updated. It was updated in the KT films so I don’t know why they would suddenly go back. Yes its a prequel so they can’t make it too advanced but its not going to look like TOS either, unless they just want people over 50 watching this show. Thats why the KT films were updated, they understand if you want TODAY audience to take it seriously it has to at least look updated from their viewpoint of what the future my look like from today. If you are just making a retro 60s look you basically telling everyone you’re just trying to redo TOS but not a real look into the future. This is what some of the TOS lovers dont seem to understand you have to update the look if you want to attract more than TOS fans because NON TOS fans just see a very outdated cheap set and not a real vision of the future in 2016. But again, this is the problems with prequels but yeah.
I’ve been subscribed for a good long while already. Plenty to watch even without the Trek.
Havd tbis new show on broadcast stations! Not everyone does streaming! If it’s not on a major network, I’ll never see it. I have been a Star Trek fan from the original TOS episode. Streaming only will just alienate fans and that is disappointing.
Ironic that people who love the future and technology of Trek won’t at the same time embrace the new real life technology needed to watch the show. It’s 2017. Streaming is a standard way of watching anything now. The only fans who will be alienated are the ones who refuse to change with the times.
Don’t you think it is more a matter of economics? Geez Plinkett, most of us have to work multiple jobs just to tread water in terms of cost-of-living, and that situation is almost certainly only going to get worse during the DISCOVERY era and its aftermath.
In addition to my fulltime day job, I have had to take nearly every single writing job offered me in the last decade, and even that doesn’t approach making up for the wages lost when my wife got an illness — still officially undiagnosed nearly a decade later, so she can’t even draw disability, and one that doesn’t let her experience much sunshine or even much UV in any form without catastrophic results — that cost her a decent living and a career she honestly loved. And that’s just the situation in a household that at least got the advantage of some opportunities, which many do not even get the chance to explore.
Your gross assumption about the fans is frankly offensive and downright stupid. It MIGHT have held a little water in more prosperous times — the 1950s, may-be — but if you looked at that Diane Saywer special from the other night, you’ll see it is wholly invalid in this rich-get-richer/everybody-else-gets-the-short-end era.
Well I’ve noticed people around here are easily offended so that’s water off a ducks back at this point. I cut the cord on my cable a while ago, use an antenna for local network stuff and I stream everything else and my cost to watch TV is half of what it used to be.
The idea that you need to spend MORE to stream is ridiculous. Cut the cable, get a good internet package and you’re all set. Laptops, tablets, or android based tv devices can be had cheap and you can stream away in HD. Why anyone spend the hundreds I hear that they do to access channels they don’t want is, frankly, stupid. A fool and his money are soon parted but a wise person keeps his money and watches Star Trek via streaming.
YEah thats the thing, its just cheaper to stream stuff than buying cable. And not only that you’re not forced into 2 year contracts with streaming and the price doesn’t just magically get more expensive.
Today if you have a smart TV or just devices like a video game console or a good computer you can get practically most shows, cable included for a third of the price. And you only get the stuff you really want. I still have cable but my friend stopped using it long ago. He has basically the streaming sites like Amazon, Netflix, Hulu while he recently got HBO Now and I think Showtime and it honestly covers 80% of what you can get on cable. Some of the stuff comes on a bit later but if you’re not obsessed with watching it all on the day of its a great deal. He pays about $60. I pay $140 and I also have Netflix which is really $150. The problem for me is I watch a lot of news and sports which streaming sites just don’t have. Cable isn’t just about watching movies and shows so its what stops me from quitting.
But I think more and more of just trying to buy the most basic package so I can keep the news channels and at least ESPN and then sign up for all the streaming sites. That would cut my expense by literally half. And yeah laptops, phones, tablets etc are only getting better and cheaper. Streaming is still not as good as TV but its improving. And watching Netflix I notice there is a lot less buffering than a few years ago. And truthfully streaming is just nice because you have the option to quit anytime. I mean all the moaners about CBS ALL ACCESS act like they have to sign up for a year to watch the show. No you just can sign up for 3 months…or A month if you decide to wait. And if you are that cheap you can just cancel Netflix or something for a month or two to watch it. I just think its funny how people moan over $6 and yet probably have a $100+ cable bill they probably watch maybe 10% of at most because NO ONE can watch 500 freakin channels. If I watch 20 of them in a month thats a good month.
Tiger2, since the giant comms corps can now buy all the senators and reps they want, I am *hoping* that Net Neutrality will stay safe. Otherwise, certain streaming could be compromised with very slow buffer times and so on. If the ISP you’re with doesn’t like the companies you stream from, good luck!
Yeah thats true. Hopefully it doesnt happen but my guess is its going to be really hard to pass something like that since I can’t think of ANYONE who wants that to happen except the corporations and the backlash would be severe.
HarryP, I agree; I haven’t had a TV in over a decade, but it was some time before I could afford internet. So there ya go.
Too many people assume everyone is in the same economic stratum as they are. I hear this constantly in news reporting and opinionator segments on the news.
No wonder nobody seems to know what it’s like to be poor — they don’t know any poor people! As for Trump and his ilk, he has people to deal with those people: a staff assistant or someone to “tell the maid” or the gardener or whoever’s on the bottom of the household totem pole. Or simply, “Staffer, make sure my environment is perfect”
This isnt about rich vs poor. Harry’s remarks were low as one would expect from him. But again, its not Paramounts responsibility to make sure people of all economic means can access their programming. Just like it isnt HBO’s responsibility or Netflix’s responsibility.
Becky Muyd I hear you but I think people in your age group also has to realize streaming is the future now and why CBS is trying to benefit from it. Of course like you I would prefer it to be on a regular station as well but I can’t blame CBS at all. The reality is TV while still a big medium, is losing people more and more every year. And of course its always been a medium where the younger you are the better because its all about selling stuff. There are now people 30 and under who don’t even OWN a TV set today. Most just watch stuff on their computers and phones. And thats only going to get bigger with every new generation and networks have to compensate.
Now TV isn’t dying or anything but the mandate is changing. I think before Netflix started making original shows the thought was streaming sites would mostly just be to watch repeats of stuff and it still mostly is but now more and more original shows are coming. And shocking they are actually pretty good. The other problem with internet was while its accessible and for the masses its always been seen as ‘cheap’ ie no one would dare to make a expensive TV show or film on it. Now its being done all the time because again there is a bigger audience who will happily pay to watch it online. Maybe a decade ago it might sound crazy but not today. More and more people are shutting off their cable for the internet. Of course cable is really just shifting to internet as well and why you can now buy HBO and I think Showtime strictly as a streaming site today. Thats just extra revenue for them and to target all those people out there who stopped owning TVs. This is just the direction the medium is going.
I suspect most of what people watch will be on TV first for a long time but I see that shifting to internet within the next 20 years personally, especially if shows like Discovery can find a big audience online. It will only encourage more networks to go that way.
Its only because its Star Trek that people are confused or upset, because they’re used to it being syndicated. Every new Netflix or HBO show that debuts, people dont complain they cant see it.
Network TV? pfffft, I still have an old radio. Why dont they turn this into a radio play? If they dont, Ill never see (or hear) it.
Hey Alex, Becky Muyd cant stream, can you change the entire delivery method and business plan behind the show so she can please?
It’s unfortunate that people are out in the cold because they can’t afford to do what you can afford to do. You can only imagine what I felt without internet access [I couldn’t afford it]. People say, oh, you can see it on the internet. Ten years or so ago, when I was dirt poor, I had to tell some upper-middle-class fellow Unitarians that “Surprise! Not everybody can afford internet!”
“Just get it on the internet!” Easily said. If you HAVE internet. If you can’t afford it, you miss out on an awful lot, and you feel poorer than ever. If internet’s the sole communications medium, then you’re in the dark.
@Marja – ten years ago? Im not sure I had sufficient internet ten years ago to stream television. Yes I can afford it now. Most people have Internet. For those that dont, its not a knock on them. Its just reality.
If they launched this on cable would we be upset because some people cant afford cable? Its a business, not charity.
hopefully, the road to good trek, is about to be pathed,good look to all that’s involved
fyi i do enjoy the jj films , just me, they are a popcorn film, trek needs to be more
“Star Trek: Discovery” to Begin Shooting on January 24th.”
Unless president Trump cancels the agreement.
Re: Unless president Trump cancels the agreement.
Hey yeah, I forgot about that. Non-domestic movie and TV productions’ cost savings are going to evaporate under him. Unfortunately, that’s likely to become another factor in delaying the next Trek film, i.e. trying to make up their minds which location likely will realize the greater overall savings in the immediate future.
Donald J. Trump,
Re: they’re going to film in America, in Pennsylvania
Shouldn’t they film at the licensed museum sets in Ticonderoga, NY, that were built the American way with largely uncompensated labor? Although, I suppose Cawley’s finally seeing some returns, but it usually takes a small business 5 years just to realize a profit.
What does Cawley know about Star Trek? Never heard of him, must be a nobody. I’ll introduce him to my tax attorney. Make Star Trek great again!
except that it’s Netflix’s global subscribers who are paying for it, not CBS.
Do they really have all the actors lined up? I thought there was going to be a captain of the Discovery and a “British male doctor” character? The Klingon characters are recurring. Something about this still seems too skimpy.
That said awhile ago they had cast a lot of the parts but haven’t named them all yet. I suspect they actually have everyone they want just working out the final deal before they announce it. And people have to remember this is how TV really does work. Most pilots are casting main roles until a few weeks before filming. But because this is Star Trek we are just updated about everything in advance. Every Star Trek show has gone through the same thing. Patrick Stewart for example was actually one of the last people cast on TNG. He wasn’t the last but he was far from the first and a few weeks before filming started.
Totally unrelated — I’m sure this will get posted in the appropriate place, but the thing that struck me about this article is not what Zoe said, but how Fox News described her as “The Star Trek actress”. Not the Avatar, or Guardians of the Galaxy actress, or otherwise, but Star Trek.
Another nice thing is that Zoe seems very proud to be a part of Trek.
She wears it like a badge of honor.
She should too. She’s a great Uhura
Yes! She is!
Actually, in the intro the anchor said “Avatar Actress Zoe….” and later, “…who also plays Lt. Uhura in Star Trek”
Oh boy, oh boy, here we go again!
Gah, I still really dislike the look of that over-busy looking logo. I think it’s those thin lines inbetween the words STAR TREK, and sticking off the ends of the words DISCOVERY. It just looks too cluttered overall to me, and would have have been better off without them I think.
That’s all I got for now.
Does anybody else find it sad that they won’t be shooting this on the Paramount lot?
There’d be nothing stopping them, there’s plenty of productions that shoot on the lot that have nothing to do with the studio, they simply rent the space and sound stages they need.
It’s all about taxes, tax credits, and wages, Lukas. Canada, Georgia, and Pennsylvania are trying their best to provide lower cost alternatives.
Yeah that’s cool I get that, but just having toured the Paramount Lot August last year and walking past the sound stages where all the magic happened and seeing the names of various Star Trek Productions on the plaques by almost EVERY sound stage, I just think it’s sad that Star Trek’s left it’s home, hell the Desilu lot where they shot TOS is part of the Paramount lot these days.
At it’s peak in the 90’s Star Trek occupied most of the Paramount Lot.
Trust you Bryan. Still plans for William Shatner?
…seems hard to have a singular vision with so many cooks in this kitchen…fingers crossed.
Do we actually have solid evidence that the show is set on a starship, the USS Discovery? Wikipedia seems to state so, but the sources cited don’t really say that directly. We saw the trailer with a USS Discovery NCC-1031, but since the CGI was so hasty and it was mentioned it’s not necessarily the final design, maybe that starship is just a metaphor for the show launching? And a decoy for us fans? I would really love to see a show not centered around one ship, but rather revolving around an ensemble of ships, maybe an exploratory/diplomatic expedition. Or some other fluid setting (stretched across different decades?).
@Jacek – I thought the same thing but it would be off to release that lousy ship CGI and not correct everyone. Unless thats a plot twist.
Breaking news: Official word that Sarek will be on the show!
And that the show will likely be delayed. I do like the quote though, that they’re putting their focus on quality over meeting some random release date.
From the article:
“Production on ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ begins next week. We love the cast, the scripts and are excited about the world the producers have created. This is an ambitious project; we will be flexible on a launch date if it’s best for the show. We’ve said from the beginning it’s more important to do this right than to do it fast. There is also added flexibility presenting on CBS All Access, which isn’t beholden to seasonal premieres or launch windows.”
BREAKING: Discovery delayed YET AGAIN as the official premiere date of May has been rescinded, with fall looking likely: http://collider.com/star-trek-discovery-premiere-date-delayed-spocks-dad-cast/#images
First, CBS Television Studios said that Discovery would premiere in January. Then they delayed it to May, but openly stated to Fuller that they were unwilling to postpone the premiere date again. Now they’ve gone back on their word and delayed it a second time. Considering how the filming won’t be finished until September 2017 now, and then they still have the post-production work to complete after that, anyone want to bet we won’t see Discovery until 2018?
Don’t get me wrong. I’d also rather they take their time to do it properly than rush it, but it just goes to show that CBS doesn’t care about science fiction. They didn’t listen to the fans, of which the majority wanted a series set in the future, after the events of Nemesis. They were too scared of low 18-49 ratings to actually air the series on their own TV channel, so instead they bumped it to a paid online SVOD service (except in Canada, where all the episodes will air on Space channel). And now with a 2nd delay in its release, it shows that either CBS’ executives were stupid enough that they didn’t consider how long it would actually take to produce a show like this, or that Discovery just wasn’t as much of a priority on their development slate as they originally made it out to be, so they don’t mind pushing it back in favor of other dramas and comedies that they’re working on.
Also, to add fuel to the fire, consider this. The filming period for Discovery is 8 months, right? The first season consists of just 13 episodes. That means CBS is only filming a little more than 1 episode per month. Talk about priorities. There are numerous cable channels that film multiple episodes of a series within a 1-month period. Even shows like Dark Matter and Killjoys on Syfy Channel film multiple episodes per month, and those are actual quality sci-fi programs in the same genre as Star Trek. So if all these cable television networks can film multiple episodes per month, why can’t a primetime broadcast network like CBS, which should have a much easier time because of having a much higher budget with more people involved in the production? Answer that, will you? Again, it seems like CBS doesn’t care.
Shooting starts tommorow… I wonder how soon the first “secret” pics might pop up…
Today should be the first day of shootings. A smart PR would twitter some pics from the sets. Star Wars would do so. Star Wars is successful, ST isn’t. They still think it is clever to exclude the fans and to hide everything. What a lame production!
It should be. But in the link to the IATSE database, the shooting dates have now disappeared!
I’m really eager to watch this movie….